Are we reading things into novels the authors themselves never intended?

[m@tty]

I've been saying this to my english (and lit) teachers ever since I can remember.

This.

But an interpretation doesn't become invalid simply because it was not intended. If an interpretation is plausible (ie. strongly supported textually) then there's no real problem. Hasn't art always been about the meaning that one draws out from it themselves? As long as people don't try and claim that "OMG this is what the author meant" whenever they present their interpretation, and the interpretation itself isn't ridiculous, I don't have a problem with it.

Though I do agree that analysing texts significantly reduces my liking for the particular book/film, and that essay writing (in VCE Englishes at least) is really a measure of one's ability to 'bullshit'.

[Spreadbury]

Though I do agree that analysing texts significantly reduces my liking for the particular book/film, and that essay writing (in VCE Englishes at least) is really a measure of one's ability to 'bullshit'.

I think the whole 'bullshitting' thing only applies to VCE literature; and even then it would depend on the text you're analysing: some are far more obvious in the ideas they put forward and point you in the right direction- that being said, you could still miss the point entirely. But it's definitely ridiculous to tell the author of the book that they're wrong; they wrote every word (most likely) and would have chosen said words to express their point. They can't be wrong.

Also, through studying Poe in VCE english i've come to understand his work a lot better, and I get lost far less often. But I have a habit of reading a paragraph, then in my head, summing up what he meant in a sentence (I suck at understanding his language ).

[Eriny]

For me, there are definitely some books I would have lost patience with if I were reading it by myself, which I was lucky enough instead to be able to study. Some of my favourite books (like The Great Gatsby, for instance) are books I had to study at school or uni.

I don't understand what posters mean by the term 'bullshiting'. Is it saying things that aren't true? Because if you have enough evidence for your claims, I don't think 'bullshit' is a word you can reasonably apply to it. Is it making stuff up on the spot? Because again, if the evidence is there, what's so wrong with it? Why the negativity?

The reason why I liked Literature in school is because it gave you some freedom to respond to work by an author on a personal level. You didn't have to regurgitate a study guide, you were encouraged to come up with an interpretation from your own perspective. I think repeating in your essays whatever your English teacher told you to write a number of lessons ago is utter bullshit though. I don't see the point in study of that kind.

[binders]

bullshitting seems to me to be like coming up with something persuasive or convincing with scant or even no evidence and with little in-depth reflection. rhetoric vs. dialectic, and therefore an art

it might be true, and there might be evidence, but you're making it up on the spot, not reaching conclusions through careful analysis. as in "i bullshitted my way through philosophy this year".

[FatnessFirst]

My school's literature class had the author of the text they were studying come in one day. They bombarded him with questions concerning their own interpretations, and he actually told them that he had never meant his writing to be interpreted in that way. Which is why I believe that VCE Literature (and to a lesser extent VCE English) is a subject that tests bull-shitting abilities more than anything else. Which, really, is a necessary life skill.

HAHA win

[chrisjb]

This year in literature for our final analysis we had to study two texts and compare them. To prove the point that you can make shit up about anything I chose napoleon dynamite and "Oh The Places You'll See" By Dr Suess. I ended up getting an A for writing four pages of total BS.

[taiga]

That said, is the task to present the author's interpretation of the text?

I think it is your own personal response to the text, whilst maintaining an acknowledgement of the general perception of the text.

[lexitu]

I've been saying this to my english (and lit) teachers ever since I can remember.

This.

But an interpretation doesn't become invalid simply because it was not intended. If an interpretation is plausible (ie. strongly supported textually) then there's no real problem. Hasn't art always been about the meaning that one draws out from it themselves? As long as people don't try and claim that "OMG this is what the author meant" whenever they present their interpretation, and the interpretation itself isn't ridiculous, I don't have a problem with it.

Though I do agree that analysing texts significantly reduces my liking for the particular book/film, and that essay writing (in VCE Englishes at least) is really a measure of one's ability to 'bullshit'.

Hehe, I agree and disagree with you I think the first point you made that "interpretation doesn't become invalid simply because it was not intended" is beautifully said. And ordinarily I would agree that over-reading and over-analysis of texts diminishes your appreciation and liking for them but in the case of 'A Man For All Seasons", my admiration for Bolt's work only increased when I noticed the intricate way in he embedded themes within his play. To the ordinary audience his devices would work subliminally much of the time, but to the scrutinising VCE student his devices are unveiled.

[lexitu]

That said, is the task to present the author's interpretation of the text?

I think it is your own personal response to the text, whilst maintaining an acknowledgement of the general perception of the text.

Pretty much It's to analyse how the author constructs meaning for their audience and conveys certain ideas. And as you've said that requires personal opinion. Furthermore, students are encouraged to look at how it can be interpreted differently by various audiences so sometimes it's good to explore beyond personal opinion.

[Winter]

There's a quote in Hamlet which is quite relevant to this discussion:
"there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so"

A writer can create a character and through what his/her words and behaviour, each reader will interpret the character differently using his/her own personal values. A character is created not only by a writer's interpretation, but by the reader's as well.

Likewise, you may find someone likeable, whilst your friend may find the same person detestable.

[lexitu]

There's a quote in Hamlet which is quite relevant to this discussion:
"there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so"

A writer can create a character and through what his/her words and behaviour, each reader will interpret the character differently using his/her own personal values. A character is created not only by a writer's interpretation, but by the reader's as well.

Likewise, you may find someone likeable, whilst your friend may find the same person detestable.

I like!

[EvangelionZeta]

There's a quote in Hamlet which is quite relevant to this discussion:
"there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so"

A writer can create a character and through what his/her words and behaviour, each reader will interpret the character differently using his/her own personal values. A character is created not only by a writer's interpretation, but by the reader's as well.

Likewise, you may find someone likeable, whilst your friend may find the same person detestable.

Beautiful, and spot-on.

[Fyrefly]

[Ghost!]

(Image removed from quote.)

Hahahahahahaha x 1000000

[funkyducky]

This is one of the reasons I'm dropping Lit in favour of English. If EngLang was offered at my school, I would definitely take it. Doing well in VCE English/Literature comes down to agreeing with your teacher's opinions in SACs, and BSing your way through the exam.